•
he reviewed the various criteria under Section 46K(1), in terms of the various aspects which sub-sections (a) to (g) (which I have set out above) require to be addressed with respect to what the minimum content of an approved DCP should be. In carrying out this exercise, in relation to each of the criteria under sub-sections 46K(1)(a)to(g), I was in each case referred us to the corresponding features of the Structure Plan (including where necessary referring to the annexed 1995 Funding Policy);
•
in relation to the fairly brief definition of "approved development contributions plan" in the Planning Scheme, Mr Montebello noted that (as required by the definition) the Structure Plan is "part of" the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, in clearly being a formally incorporated document under Clause 81 of the Planning Scheme;
•
he relied on the fact that the Structure Plan had gone through what Mr Montebello regarded as a rigorous review and scrutiny process under the Interim and Final Panel Reports for Amendment L82, and been "given a tick" under the latter of these two Reports, together with the Structure Plan being considered as part of the new format planning scheme Panel Report;
•
Mr Montebello highlighted the lack of any past challenge to the legitimacy of the Structure Plan in terms of how it deals with development contributions, and Mr Montebello put to us that "...every landowner within the area of the plan has paid a contribution in accordance with the plan". He further stated that "Proper accounts are set up under the plan and infrastructure as required by the plan is being provided by the municipal council";
•
Mr Montebello relied on the fact that no where in the Act is there any mention of a requirement that an "approved DCP" must have been created under the framework of a Development Contributions Overlay;
•
he similarly sought to "hose down" any suggestion that the absence of the words "Development Plan" in the title of the Structure Plan here has any significance. In other words, Mr Montebello argued that the key issue here is the adequacy of the contents of the relevant document, not how it has been "labelled". To reinforce this point, he relied on the fact that since the new format Planning Scheme was introduced, two of the three further DCPs have been incorporated (albeit using the framework of a Development Plan Overlay) are referred to as "Structure Plans" rather than as "DCPs".